Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802.3BA] 802.3ba XR ad hoc next step concern

Hi Dan

 

Of course if we don’t increase the cost of the basic Grade A model and have a Grade B version of the same part for extra reach with the Grade B version being loaded with any additional costs of handling two product codes and any additional testing, then we shouldn’t lose any customers.   

 

Regards

Mike Dudek

PMTS Standards & Technology

JDS Uniphase

1480 Arthur Ave.

Louisville

CO 80027

Tel  303 530 3189 x7533.

mike.dudek@xxxxxxxx

 

 

From: Dove, Daniel [mailto:dan.dove@xxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 3:23 PM
To: STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3BA] 802.3ba XR ad hoc next step concern

 

Let me re-state one word of that message.

 

From: Dove, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:00 PM
To: STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3BA] 802.3ba XR ad hoc next step concern

Hi Steve,

 

Yes that helped a lot. I hope the others on the list are not irritated by my request for repetition of the data.

 

Given the data, it truly is a challenging issue. I see a 20% premium for a 17% increase in coverage.

 

This means the confidence in the numbers is exceptionally important and assuming they are accurate, a judgement call by the committee on whether or not a 17% increase in port coverage justifies the 20% increase in cost.

 

This is important because if you increase the  *COST*  of a solution by 20%, you may decrease the number of customers who are willing to buy it by more than 20%. Thus, in the overall mix, it might turn out to satisfy less customers overall.

 

Its a pretty challenging judgement call IMHO.

 

Thanks for providing the data.

 

Dan